SKYRIMLE Purity (by Laast)

[oqhansoloqo]

There are many other texture conflicts, but I haven't gotten around to compare them.  I could just delete/hide them all in Purity, but I'm wondering if any of them might actually be improvements over STEP (like I think the mountain rock textures were).  Any input (I'm done for the night)?

Edited May 10, 2015 by oqhansoloqo

[Guest]

I have a question... Can anyone tell me if this contains meshes which are also included in my mod? I told Laast he could use my files ages ago, but I don't see any credits (if he is infact using them). He said he knew nothing about mesh editing when I offered to share my stuff, which smells fishy to me...

Edited May 11, 2015 by Guest

[TirigonX]

I have a question... Can anyone tell me if this contains meshes which are also included in my mod? I told Laast he could use my files ages ago, but I don't see any credits (if he is infact using them). He said he knew nothing about mesh editing when I offered to share my stuff, which smells fishy to me...

Purity.bsa contains only one mesh: sky\atmosphere.nif

[Guest]

That is okay then. He mentioned something about edits for waterfalls on the main page, so it was rather confusing. What is actually changed on the waterfalls, bar textures anyway? It sounds like he improved them over nature's own design from the description I read. Lol.

[oqhansoloqo]

I didn't look at them in the game much, but supposedly he added objects around the waterfalls using worldspace edits and put different god statues around some special waterfalls around skyrim.  I deleted all of it without looking to see what it actually looked like.  I just figure that there are enough shrines and statues around that I don't really want any more...  For all I know he could have drastically made a bunch of the falls look nicer...

[Guest]

Sounds stange. Who would give gifts to a shrine near a waterfall? That is just asking for trouble! When I added objects to my water mod when it was new, the reaction was much yours. A lot of ranting and swearing too. Good times, it gave me a few chuckles.

[oqhansoloqo]

OK, did a little more tonight.

 

I think the STEP tree textures look better (I did some screenshot comparisons)... so in Purity I hid textures>terrain (which includes a tree LOD); I also hid textures>landscape>trees (something with tree branches?).  I did both at the same time so I can only attest to how I thought it looked with both enabled or both disabled.  I also hid textures>landscape>dirtcliffs (I think Purity's may look a little too uniform in design, while STEP's looks more varied in design).

 

Let me know if you disagree.  I'll get through more tomorrow...

[oqhansoloqo]

I like the Purity textures>landscape>river*.* textures and prefer over STEP's.  Even though on one hand the ones in STEP cause the river beds to looks more like they belong in a mountainous area with pebble/stone mountain runoff beds, what sucks about the ones currently in STEP is that the textures try to put off the presentation that the river bed is mainly a bed of stones (and some of them fairly decent in size).  The problem with this style is that the mesh of the ground (the actual surface bumpiness of it) does not match the texture and the end result is that it looks low quality and very flat despite the attempt to fool one into thinking it's not.  Especially with the larger stones appearing on the texture just looking as flat as everything around it.  Purity uses a much more sandy/muddy type of riverbed texture.  It works better because it fits the smooth ground mesh much better.  That's my opinion.

 

EDIT: Purity's textures>landscape>grass looked good, but I decided to hide it anyway, just because I couldn't figure out if I actually thought it was better or worse than the version in STEP (which is from SFO).  Since I didn't have a strong opinion, I just decided to go with the STEP status quo...

 

EDIT2: I hid Purity's textures>sky>skystars.dds in favor of STEP's.

Edited May 12, 2015 by oqhansoloqo

[oqhansoloqo]

What I don't like - I think that nights should be darker.  Basically, Realistic Lighting Overhaul Weathers got nights perfect.  You have decent moonlight on a clear night and it is pretty much pitch black in a rain or snow storm.  All the weathers in between accurately reflect the visibility.  So there are nights where you don't need a torch, and others where you wouldn't be able to go out without one (unless you want to walk around aimlessly).  I think Purity's nights are too bright.  Laast seems to have tried to just make one version for the Steam Workshop, and so he averaged out the darkness from Pure Weather.  In his latest version of Pure Weather, he had a bright night version and a realism version (which is dark).  Too bad he didn't do similar with Purity...

[Aiyen]

Probably because pitch black nights... are a bad thing. Most monitors do not deal with it nicely, and due to the way lighting works in the engine it just looks silly when you try to do it. You will always be able to find the inconsistencies between the various distances and objects.

[oqhansoloqo]

A shame, because my LED backlit monitor does blacks very well when I set my digital color format to YCbCr444 (instead of RGB) and drop my gamma from 1 to 0.90.  It looks absolutely amazing.  Realistic Lighting Overhaul Weather gets those nights looking fantastic for me, appropriately for all weathers.  It just doesn't cover Solsteim. :(  Not to mention it doesn't have the nice saturation effects that Purity has at times.

[Guest]

Why the heck do people like dark nights? I don't want to bump into Lydia and have her win a lawsuit against me for sexual harassment. The game is designed correctly by default, so you can see what you are actually doing. Haha.

[Aiyen]

Point in fact.. if you have to adjust the gamma then your monitor does not display "properly"! :) 

 

Also I personally find that the only time I think really dark stuff can look good is if you want to emphasize some sort of lighting effects on characters etc... but for gameplay it just gets annoying fast. You do not have to go anywhere near RLO levels of dark in order to have it so a troll can still sneak up on you in the night while you are still able to mostly make out the terrain and general objects. 

 

But this is highly subjective... and if you get more enjoyment out of your game not being able to see it, who am I too argue! (too much anyways) :) 

[oqhansoloqo]

It's better gameplay to need light sources and to feel that my character is hiding in an actually dark place when enemies are searching around and can't see me when I'm pretty much right next to them (but in the dark).  It just feels beyond stupid when I am in a shadow within which everything is very easy to see and someone is walking all around next to me searching intently and saying things like, "did I hear something?"  I don't even want to play the game when it's like that.  Also, it feels beyond stupid when I'm in the middle of the forest in the middle of the night (without a light source) and I can actually see things around me when the sky is completely thickly clouded over and there's a downpouring rain storm.  In that situation the only time I should see anything is when lightning occurs.  It's less fun when dark is not dark.  Kills "immersion" and makes it lame.

Edited May 13, 2015 by oqhansoloqo

[gpthree]

Could anyone provide steps on how to remove RW2 from the Step Extended patch? Id like to use Purity instead.